4.7 Article

Thermal performance evaluation of a conical solar water heater integrated with a thermal storage system

期刊

ENERGY CONVERSION AND MANAGEMENT
卷 87, 期 -, 页码 267-273

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.enconman.2014.07.023

关键词

CSWH; Critical flow rate; Thermal stratification; Vacuum glass

资金

  1. iPET (Korea Institute of Planning and Evaluation for Technology in Food, Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries) [112056-3]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In the present research, a conical solar water heater (CSWH) with an attached thermal storage tank, with or without a vacuum glass absorber, was analyzed under different operating conditions. For maximum solar radiation of the system, the collector was equipped with a dual-axis tracking system and sun sensor, which kept the system oriented towards the sun at every instant during its operation. A forced cooling system circulated fluid to remove the solar heat from the absorber surface. Performance analyses with and without the vacuum glass absorber were conducted at different mass flow rates, inlet temperatures, and solar irradiation values. The influence of the vacuum glass cover and all operational parameters on the collector efficiency, outlet temperature, and thermal stratification were investigated. The efficiency increased with increasing inlet flow rate, and the maximum efficiency was obtained at a critical flow rate of 6 L/min. When the flow rate was increased beyond this critical value, the efficiency began to decrease. The temperature rise of the working fluid with vacuum glass at a high rate of insolation was considerably higher than without a vacuum glass for all flow rates. Use of a high flow rate deteriorated the thermal stratification process in the storage tank, while it increased the efficiency of the conical solar water-heating system. It can be concluded that the CSWH operates more efficiently if the fluid is heated slightly at a critical flow rate. (C) 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据